4 ms·

Author here, yeah noted. I should do a better job on selling the language but it's not easy doing this as a single individual. I can however elaborate on the

Author here, yeah noted. I should do a better job on selling the language but it's not easy doing this as a single individual. I can however elaborate on the points raised: - Recursive components: you can do it, the type-checker allows it and it works, or goes into an infinite loop if you don't exit correctly. - Data sharing: I don't know what you mean by this. If it's data sharing between components you can do that by creating a store and connect as many components to it as you like. - Messaging: I don't know what you are referring to? Websockets? Http? between components? The fact is that there is some many things built in that it is hard to fit it on a single page above the fold, that's why I would say it's advantages is: it's the only thing you should need. > You must start with Mint and haul in other new tools, or it doesn't work. Could you elaborate on this?

0xff00ffee 7y ago
Hi! First off, congratulations on developing and launching a product. You've done what 0.01% of developers think about but never accomplish. No criticism can take that away! As for my points: 1. thanks! 2 & 3: Reactive frameworks on an SPA are all about messaging between components. If I do an update on a dropdown, it is reactively stored in the component dataspace, but without a bus, my only choice for alerting other components is for the main component to watch that variable, keep a list of current components, and then iteratively broadcast: e.g. I must invent a message queue. How does Mint address address this problem? 4. was explained perfectly by a peer comment.
palerdot 7y ago
I think GP means that you cannot try out Mint in existing toolchain/codebase without rewriting it from scratch with Mint, which is a deal-breaker. The main selling point of VueJS and Elm (if I remember correctly) is that you can try it out in your existing code (even though with non-trivial setup). Another problem with a framework especially for UI, is that you need a network effect, that is really a good chunk of people who had tried it in production and could vouch for it, so that other folks can atleast give a thought about giving it a try. This is important given the rate of UI framework churn and JS fatigue that people have gone through in recent times. Personally, as an UI engineer who has familiarity with almost all of the existing libraries/frameworks/toolchains this looks refreshing and would not mind trying it out.
- hashbig 7y ago
  VueJS and Elm are not the same thing. Vue is just a JS library. Elm is a an entire language with its own tools and ecosystem.
  - palerdot 7y ago
    Yet, they are same when it comes to the value proposition of trying it out in the existing code base right? Since my original comment revolved around that I took those two examples (instead of say React and Vue)

0xff00ffee 7y ago

Hi! First off, congratulations on developing and launching a product. You've done what 0.01% of developers think about but never accomplish. No criticism can take that away! As for my points: 1. thanks! 2 & 3: Reactive frameworks on an SPA are all about messaging between components. If I do an update on a dropdown, it is reactively stored in the component dataspace, but without a bus, my only choice for alerting other components is for the main component to watch that variable, keep a list of current components, and then iteratively broadcast: e.g. I must invent a message queue. How does Mint address address this problem? 4. was explained perfectly by a peer comment.

palerdot 7y ago

I think GP means that you cannot try out Mint in existing toolchain/codebase without rewriting it from scratch with Mint, which is a deal-breaker. The main selling point of VueJS and Elm (if I remember correctly) is that you can try it out in your existing code (even though with non-trivial setup). Another problem with a framework especially for UI, is that you need a network effect, that is really a good chunk of people who had tried it in production and could vouch for it, so that other folks can atleast give a thought about giving it a try. This is important given the rate of UI framework churn and JS fatigue that people have gone through in recent times. Personally, as an UI engineer who has familiarity with almost all of the existing libraries/frameworks/toolchains this looks refreshing and would not mind trying it out.

hashbig 7y ago
VueJS and Elm are not the same thing. Vue is just a JS library. Elm is a an entire language with its own tools and ecosystem.
- palerdot 7y ago
  Yet, they are same when it comes to the value proposition of trying it out in the existing code base right? Since my original comment revolved around that I took those two examples (instead of say React and Vue)